Human Nature and Moral Theory in Plato’s Republic Essay -- Plato Repub

Hu troops Nature and Moral Theory in Platos majority ruleIn Chapter 2 of Republic, Glaucon uses the Myth of the Lydian Shepherd to personate a pessimistic view of humans genius. Plato, the author of Republic, uses his brother Glaucon to furcate the Myth of the Lydian Shepherd. We are led to believe that Plato takes the myth and its implications on human nature very seriously by use of a person-to-person character. The personal credit line, origin every(prenominal)y given by Thrasymachus, contends that at the root of our human nature we all yearn for the most profit possible. It in like manner contends that any man will act im incorruptly if given free reign. The theory proves unplausible receivable to circularity in the argument and implications that prove untrue. Thrasymachus approaches Socrates, the main character of Republic and most of Platos work, during a conversation on the topic of goodity. The aggressive Thrasymachus interjects his throw opinion morality is the advantage of the stronger. (Republic 338c) Upon clarification, Thrasymachus lays out his view of socially created moral relativism, as opposed to Socrates moral objectivism. Thrasymachus illustrates his view by citing how different types of regime create laws serving purposes specific to each government, a democracy exceedingly democratic laws, a dictatorship making dictatorial laws In doing so each government makes it clear that what is right and moral for its subjects is what is to its own advantage. (Republic 338e)Thrasymachus also argues that it is advantageous to live an immoral life rather than a moral one. He says, morality and right are actually good for person else and bad for the underling at the receiving end of the orders the opposite is true for evil the wrongdoer lords it over those ... ...l men desire power and superiority. However this argument raises inconsistencies because Thrasymachus Argument implies that every person in power attained that agency m otivated by the desire to commit large-scale immoral actions. The give way Argument shows that the implications of Thrasymachus Argument lead to an inevitable social collapse. Since not all societies have collapsed, some other motivation must have cause individuals to seek positions of power. In addition, Thrasymachus could not adequately support the second supposition of his argument without a defense that leads both Premise 2 and stopping point C to circularity. Thus the argument presented by Thrasymachus and Glaucon is implausible, and the moral relativism that emerges from their line of cogitate is not proven. Work CitedBloom, Allan. The Republic of Plato, New York Basic Books, 1968.